Economic Development and Evolution of Geo-economic Pattern of the “Indo-Pacific” Region

  • Yanfang Li
Part of the Research Series on the Chinese Dream and China’s Development Path book series (RSCDCDP)


This paper mainly discusses three issues from the perspective of geo-economics: First, discuss the two arguments of “the transfer of world economic centers” and the “counterbalancing China’s increasing geo-presence” through comparing the economic development dynamics of “Indo-Pacific” and “Asia-Pacific” and analyzing the economic interaction between the two regions; second, provide evidences that containing China with “Indo-Pacific” strategy may impede regional economic development by analyzing the periodic changes of the “Indo-Pacific” geo-economic pattern and comparing the influence and contribution of “Indo-Pacific” strategic partners (the U.S., Japan, Australia and India) and their balancing object (China); third, put forward some thoughts on strengthening the geo-economic cooperation in the “Indo-Pacific” region by comparing the economic inputs of China, the U.S., Japan, Australia and India in the “Indo-Pacific” region and analyzing their different attitudes towards the “Indo-Pacific” strategy. The main conclusions are that: first, despite no obvious transfer trend of the world economic center, the increased dependence of the “Asia-Pacific” region on the “Indo-Pacific” region enhances the geo-economic importance of the latter; second, the origin of the “Indo-Pacific” concept is resulted from not only the geo-economics itself but also the realistic or perceived threat on the U.S., Japan, Australia and India caused by China’s development model successfully driven by the geo-economics; third, as China has surpassed and become the leading force and defender in the regional economic cooperation years ago, the U.S., Japan, Australia and India are the challengers to the current order of the geo-economic pattern; fourth, the “Indo-Pacific” region is more important to the geo-economics of China, Japan, Australia and India than that to the U.S.; fifth, if the “Indo-Pacific” strategy attempts to contain China, it will inevitably lead to the tearing of geopolitics and geo-economics, and then damage the economic growth and integration of the region; sixth, China shall pay attention to the strategic direction of the “Indo-Pacific” strategy, seek the converging points of common interests with other countries, and dissolve the adverse factors. Meanwhile, efforts shall also be made to continuously drive a more open and inclusive geo-economic cooperation model.


“Indo-Pacific” “Asia-Pacific” Geo-economic pattern Geo-economic influence One belt one road 


  1. Abe, Shinzo. 2007. “Confluence of the Two Seas”, Speech by Mr. H.E. Shinzo Abe, Prime Minister of Japan at the Parliament of the Republic of India, Ministry of External Affairs. Accessed 11 Mar 2018.
  2. Chacko, Priya. 2016. “3 India and the Indo-Pacific from Singh to Modi.” In New Regional Geopolitics in the Indo-Pacific: Drivers, Dynamics and Consequences, vol. 57, p. 43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Khurana, G.S. 2007. Security of Sea Lines: Prospects for India–Japan Cooperation. Strategic Analysis 31(1): 139–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Khurana, Gurpreet S. 2017. The ‘Indo-Pacific’ Concept: Retrospect and Prospect.
  5. Lin, Minwang. 2018. Construction of “Indo-Pacific” and Tension of Asian Geopolitics. Foreign Affairs Review (1):103–114.Google Scholar
  6. Liu, Zongyi. 2014. Conflict or Cooperation?—Geopolitics of the “Indo-Pacific” and Geo-economics Selection. Indian Ocean Economic and Political Review (4): 4–20.Google Scholar
  7. Medcalf, Rory. 2012. “A Term Whose Time Has Come: The Indo-Pacific”.
  8. Medcalf, Rory. 2015. Reimaging Asia: From Asia-Pacific to Indo-Pacific. The Asian Forum, 26 June 2015.
  9. Scott, D. 2012. “The ‘Indo-Pacific’: New Regional Formulations and New Maritime Frameworks for US-India Strategic Convergence”. Asia-Pacific Review 19(2): 88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Scott, D. 2013. Australia’s Embrace of the ‘Indo-Pacific’: New Term, New Region, New Strategy?. International Relations of the Asia-Pacific 13(3): 425–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Weigert, H.W. 1942. Review: Haushofer and the Pacific. Foreign Affairs 20(4): 732–742.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Wu, Zhaoli. 2014. The “Indo-Pacific” Originates from Multinational Strategic Games. Pacific Journal 29–40.Google Scholar
  13. Xia, Liping. 2015. U.S. “Indo-Pacific” Strategy from Dual Perspective of Geopolitics and Geo-economics. American Studies (2): 32–51.Google Scholar
  14. Zhu, Qingxiu. 2016. Can Japan’s “Indo-Pacific” Strategy Succeed?. Northeast Asia Forum (3): 16–35.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Social Sciences Academic Press and Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yanfang Li
    • 1
  1. 1.Research Institute for Indian Ocean EconomiesYunnan University of Finance and EconomicsKunmingChina

Personalised recommendations